At de Lange opened another of his insights to our list. We have touched
the issue of measurements in organizations on several occasions, but this
point is new for me and thrilling in explaining the "All judgement is not
dignity" relation (RTL: "judgement e dignity").
>Now, whether we measure with a two magnitude scale or a million
>magnitude scale, both quantum mechanics and irreversible
>thermodynamics have taught
>us a very important lesson. Every measurement, how tiny it might be,
>disturbs the system irreversibly. Measurement changes the system. From
>irreversible thermodynamics we learn something even more astounding --
>the less the available magnitudes to cover the complete scale, the greater
>the disturbance of the system. It means that when we use a two
>magnitude scale, the disturbance of the system is the greatest. (If any of
>you fellow learners wants me to explain it, just ask.)
Dear At,
"Please explain!" is not a question, so I have to put a little more brain
into it.
After my first read, I thought that you are talking about quantum
mechanical disturbances. But these disturbances are a consequence of the
complementarity of variables, which, according to a quick scan through my
memory, has nothing to do with the number of possible output values.
A second read made clear, that you are talking of disturbances due to
irreversible thermodynamics. Hmm. I would have answered a question like:
"Disturb the system as little as possible" with "Make the measurement as
reversible as possible", which means as little as possible transformation
of energy. The typical example for this is measuring electrical voltage
(force) causing as less as possible current (flow) due to the measurement.
Therefore one needs a device with an as high as possible internal
resistance. Measuring the flow (current) requires the opposite condition:
In order not to disturb the flow, the internal resistance should be close
to zero. Ok, I think I have enought to come to quesitions:
Why do you think, that the scale of the measuring device has an influence
on the disturbance of the system? (I think you are not talking of the
lower accuracy of our knowledge with a less precice instrument) And how
do dignity and judgement fit in the force-flow picture?
The first article in the german Grundgesetz (constitution) states: The
dignity of humans is untouchable. (Die Wuerde des Menschen ist
unantastbar.) So this is the base of all laws in Germany - as well as the
basis of all court judgements. Whenever behaviour is accused to violate
this dignity in a trial, I notice, that exactly this article, on which the
argument is based, is not taken serious. The article does NOT state: "Do
not violate the dignity of humans." The article does not state something
one could do, but must not do. The article states an impossibility,
something that cannot be done.
Usually I get the argument back, that I must not forget, where this
article come from: the massive violation of the dignity of all humans
during the third reich. I really see it differently. I think, that some
"outstanding dignitary" recognised, that through all the cruelties one
thing, which was an outstanding target of Nazi-intimidations, never could
be touched: the dignity of humans. Therefore, tyranny never had and never
will have a final chance. I view this first article as a lesson learnt and
simultanously the basis for a new beginning after 1945.
At, we agree that it is possible to hurt or even to distroy the creativity
of humans. My claim is, that such hurt does not touch dignity. How do you
view the relation between creativity and dignity?
>This is what made Mandela such an outstanding
>leader. He accepted every person as a source of light. This is also what
>we must do if we want an organisation to emerge into a LO.
Please add a few words, to make clear, that this statement, to which I
fully agree, does not mean that the attempt to create learning
organizations is a hopeless and helpless attempt. I think this is very
important, because I can imagine many organizations, which became allergic
with respect to many of LO-values, we are trying to hold high.
Liebe Gruesse,
Winfried
--"Winfried Dressler" <winfried.dressler@voith.de>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>